Repeal 16th Amendment

OPINION - Reader Views - TAX STRUCTURE - Is a change in order?

April 13, 2005

Jack Chambless' article, "How to tax fairly," while well stated, failed to address the need to repeal the 16th Amendment in the event that we adopt a National Sales Tax. We certainly cannot trust that Washington will merely "turn off" an income tax forever in favor of a sales tax. It would be tempting for future lawmakers, in their thirst for ever-greater revenues, to invoke it again to cover whatever shortfall they perceive (Social Security, anyone?).

Repealing the 16th Amendment not only removes any chance of this happening, it forces Congress to place any future taxes plainly in either the direct (i.e., property) or indirect (sales and excise) tax categories, as clearly stated in Article I, Sections 2 and 8, of the Constitution.

The 16th Amendment by its definition is a tax not on our property, but on some activity as measured by how much we earn from it; however, there is no clear definition of what that activity is. This is so vague as to be arguably against the wishes of the founders, who strove for transparency and accountability in government. Repealing the 16th Amendment and installing a clear, simple sales tax can move us closer to the type of government our founders wished for us.